<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6001.18063" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
bgColor=#ffffff leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium
size=3>Michael Everson quoted and wrote:</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 24pt"><FONT face=Gentium>“<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium
size=3>>Consider it. This isn't a totally bad idea. (And <BR>>it does
serve one thing on KS's to-do list -- <BR>>mildly, and systematically,
increasing the <BR>>occurrence of <i> with respect to <y> to
satisfy <BR>>RLC users' aesthetic sense.)<BR><BR>I think that our using
<i> regularly in initial <BR>position will go a long way to helping that.
But <BR>the system has to be coherent. Marking the <BR>bÿs/bës distinction is
one thing; it solves the <BR>clash with bys/res. The proposal doesn't solve
<BR>that; it just leads to bìs/bës or bìs/bÿs/bës.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 24pt"><FONT face=Gentium>”<o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium size=3>I am
still not sold on the idea of making initial <<B
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">y</B>-> into <<B
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">i</B>-> for no better reason than to
increase the incidence of <<B
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">i</B>>.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium size=3>The
graph used in initial position should be based on the rules that determine
whether <<B style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">y</B>> or <<B
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">i</B>> should be written – not just to
make up the numbers.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium size=3>The
Owen/Dan proposal is less drastic in its effect on the number of <<B
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">i</B>>, and it is safer and more
coherent.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium size=3>I am
not convinced that <B style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">yn</B> “in” is really
any different from <B style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">yn</B> <I
style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">adverbial particle</I>. I think they are the
same word, so they should be spelt the same way. The adverbial use is some kind
of an idiom using “in”. This mutates adjectives but not nouns, so <B
style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">yn gwir</B> “in truth” is not mutated but
<B style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal">yn ta</B> “well” is.</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><o:p><FONT face=Gentium
size=3> </FONT></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium
size=3>Regards,</FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0pc 0pc 10pt"><FONT face=Gentium size=3>Andrew
J. Trim</FONT></P></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>